Tamron vs. Sigma vs. Nikon Teleconverter

[Beauty Through a Lens]

I am looking into getting a 2x teleconverter, however I am not sure which company I should buy from.

The Tamron 2.0X AF Teleconverter is 189

The Sigma 2.0X Teleconverter EX APO DG is 299

and the Nikon AF-S Teleconverter TC-20E III is much steeper price at 496.95

Quality and the amount of use is extremely important it will need to be compatible with FX and DX lenses. What your thoughts and experience on which brand is better?

[Shadowman]

I'm not sure if teleconverters are compatible with DX lenses, the rear lens element protrudes outward and interferes with the device focusing mechanism. Regarding brands, I have an offbrand 2X teleconverter (Digital Concepts) and it works fine however I have to manually focus unless I use LiveView which can be a bit unwieldy when chasing birds.

[Beauty Through a Lens]

I'm not sure if teleconverters are compatible with DX lenses, the rear lens element protrudes outward and interferes with the device focusing mechanism. Regarding brands, I have an offbrand 2X teleconverter (Digital Concepts) and it works fine however I have to manually focus unless I use LiveView which can be a bit unwieldy when chasing birds.

I know for a fact the Nikon Teleconverter supports FX & DX not sure about the others. AF is an important factor for me.

[Manfred M]

The higher the magnification the worse the output quality in any teleconverter, regardless of which brand you select. I can't remember anyone suggesting a 2x, regardless of make, is going to provide decent results.

Remember that you will lose 2 stops of light (which means on a slower lens, you could drop below the threshold of what your autofocus system needs to focus the camera (depending on the camera model, this is either f/5.6 or f/8). Unless you are using a f/4 lens with a constant aperture, your going to hit this limit.

If you must use a teleconverter, I would stick to a 1.4x, where you will get better image quality and will only lose one stop.

[Shadowman]

I know for a fact the Nikon Teleconverter supports FX & DX not sure about the others. AF is an important factor for me.

No question it supports but look at the following. And regarding the AF, my comments were related to the off brand that I have, it can AF but at the long end of my 70-300mm focal length, the mechanism shakes like a roller coaster.

https://nikoneurope-en.custhelp.com/...ail/a_id/44464

[Black Pearl]

The Nikon isn't compatible with and DX lenses - it ONLY fits longer Pro FX Nikon lenses.

http://www.nikonusa.com/en_INC/IMG/A...omp_chart.html

See how it protrude beyond the mount meaning the lens MUST have a recess at the rear:

[rpcrowe]

I know this is true regarding Canon TC's and would expect that Nikon gear is somewhat similar.

Canon TC's are only viable with the higher quality lenses, both primes and zooms. Consumer quality lenses just loose to much quality when combined with a TC.

[rtbaum]

It should also be kept in mind that the Nikon teleconverters will not work with Sigma lenses.........learned this the hard way

[William W]

. . . [Re: Tele-converters] Quality and the amount of use is extremely important it will need to be compatible with FX and DX lenses. What your thoughts and experience on which brand is better?

I use and have used Tele-converters often: Kenko; Tamron; Canon and Nikon.

My experience is that the answer to your question about which is best, is: 'it depends';

Firstly, it is very important to choose to buy/use a Tele-converter ONLY after excluding the other possible solutions. For example but not limited to: can I crop it in post production?; can I use a longer lens?; can I rent a longer lens?; would I be better to sell the lens that I have and buy another lens? . . .

Secondly, it is very very important to prescribe the exact Lens(es) and Camera(s) that you want to use with a tele-converter EVEN IF you don’t have those lens(es) and Camera(s) at the moment.

After truly believing that the best possible solution is to use a Tele-converter and knowing exactly with what lenses and cameras the Tele-converter will be used then it is CRITICAL to source accurate and definitive information as to how particular Tele-converter will mount and and how exactly it will work with the combinations of Lens(es) and Camera(s) that you intend to use.

Note also that some Manufacturers’ Documentation can be vague and /or erroneous and this I have found to be more so with third party Manufacturers than Nikon (and Canon).

Also there is much misinformation available on the www, so one must be vigilant in seeking first source documentation and verification of it, and also finding people with or getting first hand experience yourself.

Also it is important to define exactly the meaning of sentences like: "I know for a fact the Nikon Teleconverter supports FX & DX not sure about the others." This is evidenced by the responses to your Post #3. For example it might be quite OK for some Photographers to use a Tele-converter with a zoom lens, knowing that at certain zoom lengths the rear of the lens will crash into the converter - the solution being never use the lens at those focal lengths.

As a general comment - I have found that the dedicated brand Tele-converter (i.e. Nikon for Nikon // Canon for Canon) always has produced superior results rather than using a third party brand tele-converter. But note well - the above is when using lenses (and cameras) which the manufacturer specifically designates as: “compatible with” the specific tele-converter.

The main reason that I have used third party tele-converters is to allow a tele-extension of a lens which is not compatible with that particular manufactures own Extender. For example I use a Kenko Tele-converter on a Canon 85/1.8

You do not list Kenko in your choices? I believe that Kenko make Tele-converters which accommodate the longer rear protrusion of some of the Nikon DX Lenses. Here is a recent Kenko compatibility chart - but as mentioned I would not interpret the contents of this chart as Gospel.

Concerning AF Funtionality and as another general comment - you'll generally be pushing it uphill to get good AF using any x2.0 Tele-converter if your native lens is slower than F/2.8 and the same applies with using any x1.4 tele-converter if your native lens is slower than F/4. There are exceptions and workarounds with specific combinations of lenses and cameras, but that's just general guide.

To best address your question you could outline the exact lens(es) and camera(s) that you are using or considering using and clearly define your outputs and goals.


WW

[William W]

. . .I can't remember anyone suggesting a 2x, regardless of make, is going to provide decent results. . .

I can and I mention it to specifically emphasize an important point about using T/Cs. The print is fine at 20" along the base.



This is the 70 to 200F/2.8L USM + 2.0MkII used at 400mm @ F6.3 @ 1/1600s @ ISO250 Head-On Motion - Hand Held. Note this is the lens stopped down only 1/3 stop.

My x2.0MkII is a pretty handy device to always have in my kit and to use as an alternative to the 400F/2.8L, which is heavy.

The top is the crop to the final print, the bottom is an enlargement of it.

Better results are attained with the MkIII Extender and the EF 70 to 200 F/2.8 L IS MkII USM.

The Canon x2.0Mkii and MkIII Extenders also work marvelously on many of the L Series Primes (with particular 'compatible' EOS Cameras), and I have conducted many A/B tests which generally conclude using the Extender is better than cropping in these cases.

***

Adrian:

Again, re-iterating the point that this x2.0MkII Extender EF and the EF 70 to 200F/2.8L USM lens are specifically listed as "compatible" by Canon - and also note that combination of Lens and Extender was used with a Camera listed as "compatible" by Canon to allow Auto Focus withnthat lens and extender combination - and this particular point cannot be stressed enough.

So you should read this post as endorsing Manfred's comment and not arguing with him.

So many photographers invest money in T/Cs with expectations of fantastic results and end up with mere frustration and also being out of pocket several hundred dollars for the learning experience.

I am reasonably confident that there will be Lens // Tele-converter // Camera combinations in the modern Nikon Equipment cache that will provide very good to excellent results when using the latest Nikon x2.0 Tele-converter; but that will undeniably mean that it will require an initial investment ONLY in Nikon's best quality lenses.

I very much doubt you'll get that quality from any DX Lens, no matter how good that lens might be when used on its own.

Also it is my experience that is very rare to get a Zoom Lens and T/C combination (such as the example above) which would I expect conform to the general criteria that you have outlined in your Post #1 and Post #3, so that could possibly mean you will be restricted to Primes Lenses only, that is unless you change your priorities and your expectations.

WW

[Beauty Through a Lens]

The Nikon isn't compatible with and DX lenses - it ONLY fits longer Pro FX Nikon lenses.

http://www.nikonusa.com/en_INC/IMG/A...omp_chart.html

See how it protrude beyond the mount meaning the lens MUST have a recess at the rear:

If this one works with DX why does the 1.4x not?

[Beauty Through a Lens]

It should also be kept in mind that the Nikon teleconverters will not work with Sigma lenses.........learned this the hard way

Oh....I'm assuming they won't work with Tamron lenses then...

[William W]

If this one works with DX why does the 1.4x not?

I refer you to the NIKON DATA PAGE: specifically the Nikon's LENS COMPATIBILITY CHART for that converter.

I only had a quick glance, but, only in that quick glance I think that all the lenses listed in that COMPATIBILITY CHART are: “FX lenses” – but I am open to correction on that as I am pushed for time at the moment.

Also note that somewhere there will (should) be a NIKON Document which lists their Camera compatibility with that particular Tele-converter and it should also specify any individual lenses' nuances: for example some specific lenses may only AF at the centre point on some cameras, etc.

In any case - as previously mentioned there is much ambiguity, misinformation and confusing statements on websites and the www generally. My reason for responding quickly is to reinforce my opinion is that it is best to refer to First Source Documents (not second source advertising material) and then to have that data corroborated by the Manufacturer, preferably in writing, if it is big money that one is investing.

Robin (or other specialist Nikonians) might have more detailed knowledge on these matters and I also would be interested - but I am a bit rusty on Nikon as I haven't used Nikon for a while.

WW

[Black Pearl]

My understanding is that Nikon make their 1.4x converters in a way that is compatible with a wider range of lenses as you only lose around 1 stop of light so you can use them with a wider range of lenses with various maximum apertures and still achieve consistent auto focus. With the 2x converters you lose 2 stops of light so typically need a f2.8 (or brighter) lens to still achieve AF with the converter fitted. Nikon build their 2x converters in a way that physically stops you fitting it to a lens where full AF performance won't be achievable. Its a bit of an odd approach (not restricted to Nikon by the way as Canon and Sigma sometimes do the same) but Nikon are a bit of an odd company.